Complex immigration rules made simpler with expert legal advice

The subject of immigration is rarely out of the news. Having gained first-hand experience in business immigration matters while with the top ranked B P Collins LLP employment group, I can see why.

The rules on immigration are in a constant state of flux. This year alone, we have seen the introduction of the Immigration Act 2014, changes to the Immigration Rules and changes to several of the policy guidelines, to name but a few. How does anyone keep up?

The changes reflect the Government's tougher stance on immigration as well as a shift of responsibility onto those who directly benefit from migration, for instance employers and education providers.

In most circumstances, a business that wishes to employ workers from outside of the European Economic Area ('EEA') must apply for a sponsor licence.

I have assisted with one of our business immigration matters from start to finish and soon realised that obtaining a sponsor licence is not as straight forward as it might seem at first glance.

Our client is the UK branch of a USA parent company that wished to bring an experienced employee of the USA parent company into the UK to train its employees.

Before considering an application for a sponsor licence, we reviewed our client's contracts and handbooks, advised on the suitability of different visas for its intended migrant worker and assessed whether the proposed migrant was eligible under the Points Based System ('PBS').

Each type of migrant visa requires the migrant to meet specific qualifications and remuneration in accordance with the PBS. After all, there is little point in applying for a sponsor licence if the intended migrant does not meet the requisite requirements for the Certificate of Sponsorship (CoS) or the visa application.

After obtaining the sponsor licence, we advised our client on how to assign a CoS to the USA migrant worker through the Sponsorship Management System.

As well as advising our client, we also liaised directly with the USA migrant to ensure all of her paperwork was in order in preparation for her visa application.

Any inaccuracies could have resulted in our client's sponsor licence application being rejected or the intended migrant being unsuccessful. Thankfully, it all went off without a hitch!

We also advised our client on its continuing responsibilities as a sponsor licence holder. The home office has powers to downgrade, suspend and revoke sponsor licences where they believe the employer to be in breach of the licence conditions.

As recently as 4 September 2014, UK Visa & Immigration (UKVI) has introduced further guidance on the responsibilities of those who sponsor migrant workers, with an emphasis on the repercussions of failing to meet them.

The guidelines reflect changes that were arguably already in motion. Statistics released on the www.publications.parliament.uk show a 178.4% increase in Tier 2 and Tier 5 sponsor licence suspensions from the third quarter of 2013 to the fourth quarter.

Sponsor licence holders should take heed of the recent changes and last year's statistics. It is essential that all licence holders are aware of their increased responsibility. They must have the appropriate procedural compliance checks in place to ensure they are successful in their application for a sponsor licence and to avoid their licence subsequently being downgraded, suspended or revoked.

Posted by Rebecca Mitchell, trainee in the employment practice group.

Rebecca started her training contract in September 2013 after graduating from Newcastle University with a 2:1 (BA Hons) in History. She undertook the Graduate Diploma in Law at Kaplan Law School and has recently completed the Legal Practice Course with distinction.

Do you really own your address book?

What happens when an employee resigns from a company to either set up on their own or to join a competitor?

Employers must be aware that knowledge and client databases built up by an employee during their employment could potentially be very damaging to their businesses future.

Employees may think they have a right to take with them any contacts built up through the course of their employment this, however, is not the case. The key point is when the relationship between the employee and client started. If it was through the course of their employment, then the employer is most likely actually the owner of the information.

In businesses where information, such as client databases, are the key to their success, employers should protect themselves by ensuring they have a very well drafted contract to prevent employees from using the potentially damaging information should they resign and move to a competitor.

Both employers and employees should carefully consider the extent of restrictions contained within their contracts and the implications of these restrictions. It is very likely that employers will have a contract drafted which prevents employees from competing should they leave the company.

The employer cannot impose unlimited restrictions on an employee as this would be thrown out if challenged through the courts. Restrictions must be considered reasonable and it is common to find a restriction within a contract preventing an employee from competing with their previous employers for three to six months after their departure. Whether the restriction will be regarded as reasonable will largely depend on the nature of the work but there are also many other factors that will need to be considered.

This blog ties in well with Simon Hall's previous post about social networking sites, especially LinkedIn. Despite being able to have a LinkedIn profile whether or not you are currently employed, if an employee has built up their contacts on LinkedIn due to a policy enforced by the employer (therefore, through the course of business), it can be argued that the employee has no right to this information upon their resignation from the company.

If an employee fails to abide by their contract and carries out an action such as contacting clients from their previous firm, there is the option to apply to the court for an injunction to prevent the employee from continuing with this act, thus enforcing the restrictive covenants within their contract.

The employment group at B P Collins can advise individuals as to the extent and implications of such restrictions within their contracts and can also assist employers in drafting a water tight contract. In the event that ex employees still attempt to use the information gathered in the course of business prior to resigning, our team can also advise in relation to injunction proceedings.

Posted by Gemma Hunter, trainee in the Employment law practice group.



Gemma started her training contract with the firm in October 2011 having studied Law and Criminolgy LLB at the University of Sheffield and the LPC at the College of Law, Bloomsbury.